Hi Jammer,

Thank you for your opinion that is only based on assumptions. And no it does not effect my calculations.
Perhaps it is you who should reexamine the Cubit Rods on display at Turin Museum. We have had this conversation before; <[www.hallofmaat.com];
There are different scales on the same rods not all 28 subdivisions and the scale lengths vary among the surviving rods there are all different lengths. If different lengths were the only issue you might explain it away by saying "that the AE lost the quality control to reproduce the cubit rod accurately", but that too is only an assumption. What I would be interested in is an explanation of the different scales on these same rods. Why are they marked with different subdivisions of 7, 12, 24, 27, 28, 72, and 360 to 448 smaller divisions?
Specimen #4: Turin Museum catalog #6349. has 3 scales A B C with scales B and C starting at opposite sides of the same side.
Scale B divided into 27 parts:
Scale C divided into 12 major intervals, 72 subdivisions, and 360 fine divisions

Specimen #5: Turin Museum catalog #6348
Scale A: Length = 20.626 (24) Digits mean length = 0.859

Cubit rod of 24 divisions 20 34/55 / 24 = 189/220 or (0.859090...) Specimen #5 scale "A"
Cubit rod of 28 divisions 20 34/55 / 28 = 81/110 or (0.7363636...) Specimen #4 scale "A"
Cubit rod of 27 divisions 20 1/4 inches in length 20 1/4 / 27 = 3/4 or (0.75...) Specimen #4 scale "B"

There are many more such variances begging for answers, but as always, it is your prerogative to ignore them if you wish.

Regards
Jacob